I was against the tournament, until it happened. I have been converted but believe a neutral site ought to be considered strongly. The result this year on the mend side shows why. Penn and Harvard were equal in most respects coming into the tournament. Neutral sites were always selected for playoffs. Penn won this year by the margin generally accorded the home team. That is unfortunate in my opinion

I too am a Penn/Columbia grad, although my fandom is pretty much 100% Penn (I do root for CU against everyone else). The arguments being made are all legitimate. The most essential test of our best team is over 14 games, and it fits with the Ivy ideal. That being said, there is a tournament and it is designed to showcase the League. No, it is not fair that Penn gets a home court advantage, and there is little doubt it is an advantage in the tournament, as the last 2 years have shown. But there is no other arena which provides the show--I was listening to Freddie Coleman last night on ESPN Radio and he was singing the praises of the Ivy tournament at the Palestra (and said the Penn-Kansas game would be close). You're not going to promote the brand nearly as well anywhere else, plus, other than Princeton, there is no other Ivy arena that can handle it. So do we pay a lot of money to host the tournament in a 3rd party site, hoping (as HarvardGrad suggests) that a tournament in a place like Foxwoods would garner large socializing crowds of Ivy-ites in a giant Kumbaya? It makes no business sense at all, since there is insufficient planning time once the seeds are set to get people to make plans and block rooms at a cost that will get people to come. Perhaps Alumni Hall at St John's would work, even though it is another school's home arena and there really is no place to stay there for those travelling (the argument that there is no place to stay near the Palestra is ridiculous--there are 8000 hotel rooms within 2 miles).

But I realize it isn't fair to keep it at the Palestra---will the Ivy Presidents be willing to absorb the very substantial costs of holding it elsewhere?

The neutral site issue is a fair one, I wish there was a good solution to that but I'm not seeing one. I was very happy about the student attendance, which kind of kills Mohegan Sun as a venue and leaves Bridgeport as the best neutral court option - not optimal.

I'd guess that the league will need to think about rotating the tournament.

The opening post for this topic suggested that the Palestra would not be a significant advantage for the Quakers is needless to say ridiculous. The Palestra was clearly, as it should be, an advantage for the Quakers last Sunday. Vegas obviously recognizes the benefits of home court advantage when establishing point spreads. A neutral site clearly was and is the right way to determine a conference champ as you suggest.

If the IL geniuses continue to press on with the Palestra for next year highly unlikely. it will be revealing.

Harvard did get screwed this year although I do not feel bad for them as they voted to create IvyMadness in the current format. But I do feel bad for the players and the Crimson fans who had enough common sense to either object to the tournament or at the very least, the format.

The Palestra crowd did give Penn a slight advantage but you know what - if you want to dance then win the frigging game. I get on Penn fans for whining when they feel like they got jobbed by refs. Excuses are for losers.

Penn has to play away at Kansas in the NCAAs, that isn't "fair" either. Whatever. Play the game.

The opening post for this topic suggested that the Palestra would not be a significant advantage for the Quakers is needless to say ridiculous.

I stand by my statements in that post. As I pointed out before. I still do not think HCA mattered at all in the Yale game. What I did not count on was the size and activity of the crowd in the final. Even then, I do not believe it was the difference in the game.

Here is the takeaway. The HCA problem is really only an issue in years when the home team makes the final. So, unless we assume Penn makes the final for the foreseeable future, what's the problem?

The opening post for this topic suggested that the Palestra would not be a significant advantage for the Quakers is needless to say ridiculous. The Palestra was clearly, as it should be, an advantage for the Quakers last Sunday. Vegas obviously recognizes the benefits of home court advantage when establishing point spreads. A neutral site clearly was and is the right way to determine a conference champ as you suggest.

If the IL geniuses continue to press on with the Palestra for next year highly unlikely. it will be revealing.

Harvard did get screwed this year although I do not feel bad for them as they voted to create IvyMadness in the current format. But I do feel bad for the players and the Crimson fans who had enough common sense to either object to the tournament or at the very least, the format.

Amazingly enough, the Princeton women somehow found a way to prevail against the Quakers on Sunday.

I graduated from both Penn and Columbia and am an avid supporter of both.

Did you rewatch the Mesiner taunt yet on that inbounds pass? Maybe the dumbest decision by any player this season as it completely lit the fuze for Penn.

penn nation Said:

Penn takes the longest road trip of the season to Hanover. Followed by a early am arrival in Allston/Cambridge, but plays an early 6 pm game (as opposed to other Saturday night Ivy games on other weeks in Allston that started hours later).

Did you rewatch the Mesiner taunt yet on that inbounds pass? Maybe the dumbest decision by any player this season as it completely lit the fuze for Penn.

You won't give that play up, will you?

If you have a link then I'll rewatch, not that it's likely I'll be able to see anything definitive or my opinion is going to change. I agree it wound up firing up Penn and did nothing for Columbia. Penn's attitude is a big reason why they won the league - they are more than the sum of their parts because of the way they back up each other.

No, I won't. It was completely uncalled for and has yet to be acknowledged. It was beyond definitive and every non-partial person I've shown it to has been blown away and wonders what he could have been thinking. Must have just been a brain fart in the moment. I'll get a link to you.

BTW, Brown played all of it's home Saturday games at 6, including the Penn game. That let's us old guys choose between the "Early Bird" at 4, or a reasonable dinner after the game, and still get us home at Bert "be home" Byleven. (Quote from Boomer, B'77).

Yes. It was quite offensive. He moved even closer to Caleb, stood over him and then glared. It was bad enough in real-time that almost the entire Penn bench immediately reacted the same way. I guarantee you it will be remembered when they play next year as well. My big gripe (and why you're still reading about it) was the way it was completely ignored by the CU fans to the point that one fan even blamed the Caleb 3 on the official talking to Meisner and not "allowing him to crowd." I have watched it way too many times because it is the perfect demonstration of how these guys came together and won as a team and every person I showed it to was taken aback. It was a full on taunt and rightfully ended that game.

They certainly did have home court advantage -- I guess the benefit of being #1 seed. It was so sweet when Penn was up by 10 pts in the 1st half and the crowd as well as KU players were dazed. I love it when the IL teams get these big time programs nervous. It also helps the reputation of the league to some extent by playing tough. Playing well at the Big Dance far exceeds the PR that comes out of IvyMadness.

Today was a perfect example as to why it is important that the Il sends its best to the Big Dance. This year, or Harvard (with Towns) would have competed well while Yale or Cornell probably would have been trounced. Although Penn should have been a #15 seed, it is virtually impossible to win a game as a #16 or really #15 seed. Until the IL is truly a legitimate 2 bid league, all you can hope for is that the best 1 or 2 teams win IvyMadness every year.

To truly enhance the reputation of the league, IL must have a consistent #12 seed that wins not only one game but occasionally two games and magically 3 once in a blue moon.

Penn did the league well today considering their seed and being a road team. It probably did not hurt that the KU big barely played.

I always amazed how some proponents of IvyMadness do not consider reality but I guess the motto is let's have fun.